Majority (64%) of scientists are skeptical of global warming, study shows

[Nakura Chambers]

It is becoming clear that not only do many scientists dispute the asserted global warming crisis, but these skeptical scientists may indeed form a scientific consensus.

Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem.

The survey results show geoscientists (also known as earth scientists) and engineers hold similar views as meteorologists. Two recent surveys of meteorologists (summarized here and here) revealed similar skepticism of alarmist global warming claims.

Read more: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestay...arming-crisis/

The study is from February, but it's interesting how this contrasts greatly with what we've been hearing from a certain group of politicians. This coupled with the recent evidence that the polar ice caps might not be shrinking after all, is rather alarming. I don't really know enough about "global warming" to hold a view one way or another, but this is an interesting development. What do you guys think?

[Themius]

The study is from February, but it's interesting how this contrasts greatly with what we've been hearing from a certain group of politicians. This coupled with the recent evidence that the polar ice caps might not be shrinking after all, is rather alarming. I don't really know enough about "global warming" to hold a view one way or another, but this is an interesting development. What do you guys think?

Article says "majority" not... vast majority... vast majority is like 80%+

A comment from the article

If you read the study, you’ll find that the scientists polled are all members of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists in Alberta (APEGA).

According to the study’s authors, “The petroleum industry – through oil and gas companies, related industrial services, and consulting services – is the largest employer, either directly or indirectly, of professional engineers and geoscientists in Alberta…These professionals and their organizations are regulated by a single professional self-regulatory authority –APEGA.”

Given that the vast majority of participants in the poll are directly employed not just by the petroleum industry, but by a sector of the industry involved in one of the dirtiest methods of petroleum extraction (tar sands), it doesn’t seem at all surprising that an inordinate number of them would doubt the danger of climate change, or feel that it’s unlikely to impact them personally. (Especially given the fact that Alberta is hardly at risk from rising sea levels.)

What’s telling is that a very large percentage of them (36%) are nevertheless highly concerned about climate change. One wonders how they sleep at night.

It would be interesting to see the results of a similar poll taken amongst engineers and geoscientists in, say, Bangladesh.

[Kalis]

The study is from February, but it's interesting how this contrasts greatly with what we've been hearing from a certain group of politicians. This coupled with the recent evidence that the polar ice caps might not be shrinking after all, is rather alarming. I don't really know enough about "global warming" to hold a view one way or another, but this is an interesting development. What do you guys think?

From the very first post...

"The survey the author cites isn’t “scientists” as stated in the title of the op-ed, it is a survey of the Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists of Alberta. That’s like surveying tobacco company CEO’s about the dangers of smoking. It would be a reasonable piece about the opinion of petroleum engineers in Alberta if that was made clear, instead that was hidden. I wonder why?"

[Themius]

Questioning Global Warming like this annoys me. It's not like it changes anything... all the measures pretty much lower pollution and well pollution is a serious problem. If a person is anti-global warming measures I must question... are they pro pollution?

[Funky Kong]

My brother's a member of APEGA (he's a geomatics engineer).

Let's just say trying to argue with him about global warming is like arguing with a donkey.

[Simulacrum]

"Scientists" being the key word here.

[zephid]

From the very first post...

"The survey the author cites isn’t “scientists” as stated in the title of the op-ed, it is a survey of the Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists of Alberta. That’s like surveying tobacco company CEO’s about the dangers of smoking. It would be a reasonable piece about the opinion of petroleum engineers in Alberta if that was made clear, instead that was hidden. I wonder why?"

Pretty much this^

Useless study.

[Garnier Fructis]

The study is from February, but it's interesting how this contrasts greatly with what we've been hearing from a certain group of politicians. This coupled with the recent evidence that the polar ice caps might not be shrinking after all, is rather alarming. I don't really know enough about "global warming" to hold a view one way or another, but this is an interesting development. What do you guys think?

Did you even try reading the article you quoted? They polled 1077 engineers (not scientists) and geoscientists who all work for the same organization, who have a vested interest in denying Global Warming.

Do you know how bad that is? That's like polling 2000 Evangelical Christian Chemists about Evolution and then declaring that 80% of scientists do not believe in it.

This is almost exactly like an article they ran a few years ago which made the exact same claim and was also a study done by an economics journal that polled petroleum engineers. I took the time to read that study and aside from a few strange bits they never explained (what happened to the last 10% or so of respondents?), the study itself said that the consensus among scientists was that we are driving Climate Change. It made itself clear in the introduction that it was polling a specific group.

But Forbes didn't give a shit about details because Forbes is retarded.

[Lefeng]

So 64% of people that are paid to be skeptical about everything are skeptical about something? How is this news?

[Dundebuns]

Did you even try reading the article you quoted? They polled 1077 engineers (not scientists) and geoscientists who all work for the same organization, who have a vested interest in denying Global Warming.

Do you know how bad that is? That's like polling 2000 Evangelical Christian Chemists about Evolution and then declaring that 80% of scientists do not believe in it.

This is almost exactly like an article they ran a few years ago which made the exact same claim and was also a study done by an economics magazine that polled petroleum engineers. I took the time to read that study and aside from a few strange bits they never explained (what happened to the last 10% or so of respondents?), the study itself said that the consensus among scientists was that we are driving Climate Change. It made itself clear in the introduction that it was polling a specific group.

But Forbes didn't give a shit about details because Forbes is retarded.

Love it when people claim that those who deny man made global warming are on the pay roll of big oil and the like. Do you not think the politicians pushing an alarmist agenda don't have financial interests in companies that make wind farms and the like?

[Onomatopoeia]

Based off what you quoted, it still implies they believe global warming is a thing,just not a man made thing.

[RaoBurning]

Was expecting Riddler again. Happy to be disappointed.

As has been stated, the sampling is not indicative of anything meaningful. If, say, 90% of climate scientists, or other relevant fields, from around the globe were in doubt then I'd say there's something to look at. Last I heard however the global community is as close to unanimous on the subject as one can reasonably expect, given that some people still think the world is flat.

[Funky Kong]

Questioning Global Warming like this annoys me. It's not like it changes anything... all the measures pretty much lower pollution and well pollution is a serious problem. If a person is anti-global warming measures I must question... are they pro pollution?

Why does everyone think of cars and exhaust fumes when they think of oil?

We need oil to make plastics, without it we wouldn't have stuff like IV's or IV bags in hospitals, surgical needles, electronics, medicine (Acetylsalicylic acid for example is used in painkillers and comes from petroleum), polyester clothing, nylon, shoes, printer ink, erasers, tape, life jackets, band-aids, inhalers, surgical gloves, rubbing alcohol, antiseptics, oxygen masks, etc. Just to name a few.

As for global warming I don't deny that it's happening, but I think the blame on oil extraction is misplaced. 80-85% of emissions from the oil industry come from vehicles burning the products from the oil vs ~15% from actually obtaining the oil to make stuff with.

Even then, emissions from oil are dwarfed by emissions from coal burning. But nobody wants to point the finger at the coal industry because they would have to find another way to charge their precious iPads.

[s_bushido]

http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/20...-james-taylor/

By suggesting a survey of industry geoscientists can be generalized to scientists as whole, Taylor has demonstrated the intellectual dishonesty inherent in denialist argumentation.

The paper is actually quite interesting, and I’m glad I read it, as it is consistent with our thesis that ideological conflicts result in refusal to accept science that contradicts one’s overvalued ideas or personal interests. The authors surveyed a professional association of geoscientists in Alberta Canada (APEGGA), most of whom are working for the petroleum industry, and then performed a detailed analysis of their free-text responses on why they accept or reject climate science.

The authors weren’t attempting to validate the consensus with this study, but rather were trying to understand how scientists working in industry justify their position on global warming, as they often reject the consensus view of climate science.

So that's from someone writing for the other "side." Pretty much sums up the rational response to the claims made in the OP's article.

[Garnier Fructis]

Love it when people claim that those who deny man made global warming are on the pay roll of big oil and the like. Do you not think the politicians pushing an alarmist agenda don't have financial interests in companies that make wind farms and the like?

Scientists who deny climate change are either being paid to do so or are just that outlier that every field has, or work in other fields. Politicians just jump on whatever they believe is true. Politicians who don't believe in climate change aren't necessarily on the "pay roll of big oil," they're probably just distrustful of science in general.

But you seem to have hand-waved away my whole post and just started using buzz words like big oil and alarmist. You also seemed to have missed the fact that these guys really are working for petroleum companies. So do you have an actual argument about the topic in the OP?

[dusketernal]

The scientists who matter for this are the climate scientists. The vast majority of climate scientists who are publishing research (most studies put it at over 90%) are firmly on the side that climate change (aka global warming) is happening. So until the other side starts publishing more research and are climate scientists, polls like this are pretty much nothing more than bs designed to undermine scientific evidence using questionable stats.

[Themius]

Why does everyone think of cars and exhaust fumes when they think of oil?

We need oil to make plastics, without it we wouldn't have stuff like IV's or IV bags in hospitals, surgical needles, electronics, medicine (Acetylsalicylic acid for example is used in painkillers and comes from petroleum), polyester clothing, nylon, shoes, printer ink, erasers, tape, life jackets, band-aids, inhalers, surgical gloves, rubbing alcohol, antiseptics, oxygen masks, etc. Just to name a few.

As for global warming I don't deny that it's happening, but I think the blame on oil extraction is misplaced. 80-85% of emissions from the oil industry come from vehicles burning the products from the oil vs ~15% from actually obtaining the oil to make stuff with.

Even then, emissions from oil are dwarfed by emissions from coal burning. But nobody wants to point the finger at the coal industry because they would have to find another way to charge their precious iPads.

Did I mention oil and plastic? People point their fingers at coal all the time...

[ThatCanadianGuy]

"By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem."

Whether we're the cause or not, it's still happening. We still need to be ready.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Love it when people claim that those who deny man made global warming are on the pay roll of big oil and the like. Do you not think the politicians pushing an alarmist agenda don't have financial interests in companies that make wind farms and the like?

There's money behind everything. The point is that most scientists whose findings point to GCC tend to be independently funded to do research the proper way, where denial scientists are funded to simply deny GCC and all other results that they don't like are thrown out. Their studies have pretty reliably been selective about data sets, fudged results, and moving the goal posts every couple of years ("Global warming is fake!" "Global warming might be real but it's natural!" "Ok so we are causing it but it's not as bad as we thought!")

Here's the kicker about global climate change though: It doesn't care whether or not people "believe in it" or not. Not believing in Oxygen doesn't suddenly mean my body runs off of unicorn fart gas.

[Themius]

Love it when people claim that those who deny man made global warming are on the pay roll of big oil and the like.

But... they quite literally are.